But is that warning enough to divorce the company from liability for these so-called, “high speed selfies”? Should it have known that people were going to use (and in fact were using) the filter to record themselves driving fast behind the wheel?

A car accident lawsuit filed recently in Georgia asserts that company should be held responsible to compensate for injuries caused by an 18-year-old driver who used the filter while allegedly traveling 107 mph. Plaintiff alleges the company “motivated” younger drivers to use the filter while driving by doling out points for using the app, encouraging use during everyday activities – like driving. 

The young driver and the friends in the car with her have argued instead that it was plaintiff who drifted into their lane, causing her to lose control of the vehicle.

Plaintiff says as a result of the crash, he suffered severe traumatic brain injury and was hospitalized for five weeks. A former Uber driver who had just started his shift at the time of the crash, he has reportedly been unable to return to work.

An accident reconstructionist reportedly determined that at the time of the crash, defendant driver was traveling at 107 mph. Shortly after the crash, as the teen lie on a stretcher, in a neck brace and with blood dripping down her face, she snapped another photo. That one she captioned, “Lucky to be Alive.”

The case is interesting not only for the fact that it once again underscores the dangers of distracted driving (which largely involves people who refuse to put down their smartphones), but it also highlights a new push to recognize distraction as a danger akin to drunken driving. Cases like this will continue to crop up if we treat providers of this technology the same way we do bars under state dram shop laws. Licensed establishments that serve alcohol can be held liable in some cases for serving to minors or those who are known to be habitually addicted to alcohol. Plaintiffs here are seeking accountability from Snapchat here in the same way.

Founder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving and also of a new organization called Partnership for Distraction-Free Driving, Candace Lightner, called distracted driving a killer that is still socially acceptable.

Snapchat awarded users “trophies” for using the speed filter, but never expressly offered trophies for high speed driving. The app itself displays the warning not to Snap and drive.

The local Georgia police department handling the case has not charged the teen driver with speeding because, a representative says, there were conflicting reports about how fast she was driving. The agency is investigating that aspect as well as whether she was using social media while driving and also whether plaintiff may have violated the law by changing lanes without signaling.

Petitions on Change.org have called for Snapchat to nix the speed tracker. The company has not at this juncture given any indication that it would do so.

If you have been a victim of a traffic accident, call Chalik & Chalik at (954) 476-1000 or 1 (800) 873-9040.

Additional Resources:

Snapchat at 107 MPH? Lawsuit Blames Teenager (and Snapchat), May 3, 2016, by Katie Rogers, The New York Times

More Blog Entries:

Moreno v. City of Gering – Government Liability in Bus Accident, April 27, 2016, Car Accident Lawyer Blog

Many of the calls emergency dispatchers receive must be transferred to other jurisdictions and the 911 callers may not be present to see the driver they suspected of driving while inebriated, but both Texas dispatchers and police have stated that passing motorists are a great help. The director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Jeff Miracle, says that he speaks to someone approximately once a month who feels they called 911 to report a potentially drunk driver, only to have to eventually give up when an officer did not arrive in time to make a stop. But, says Miracle, he knows the police are trying to catch as many drunk drivers as possible.

The police have stated that the 911 calls from a concerned citizen often must be transferred from one jurisdiction to another as the driver crosses county lines and other police departments must become involved. A typical department may have as few as half a dozen officers in the DWI unit, and those officers cannot be throughout the city. A citizen call to 911 can be the crucial connection which allows a DWI officer to respond to suspected drunk driving in an area through which pass thousands and even tens of thousands of cars.

When someone calls 911 to report a suspected inebriated driver, dispatch operators are trained to ask specific questions, including the cross street, direction heading, a description of the vehicle, the color, the license plate, and what direction in which they are heading. While an individual can follow the driver if they feel safe doing so, the decision to do so is voluntary.

Of the approximately 182,000 911 emergency calls the city of Irving received last year, it is estimated that close to 2,400 of those calls were for suspected drunk driving. In 2011, there were more than 2,500 DUI-related car accidents in Texas, which resulted in more than 3,000 deaths.

In Texas, it is a crime to drive with a blood alcohol content concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or more. More restrictive laws apply for commercial drivers. Commercial vehicle operators must not have a BAC of 0.04% or more. Minors (individuals under age 21) commit an offense if driving with a BAC of 0.01% or more.

At The Hale Law Firm, we have helped thousands of clients successfully prosecute their personal injury claims including auto accidents, wrongful death, dangerous products, brain injuries, burn injuries, and defective medical devices. Clients depend on their personal injury lawyers for guidance and legal advice across a broad range of personal injury accidents. To learn more, visit http://www.hale911.com/ or call 972.351.0000.